The two-step flow theory of communications suggests that the media’s influence on the behaviour of the public is limited by opinion leaders. These are members of society who initially consume media content, interpret it considering their own beliefs and values, and then pass that message on to their less-active opinion followers. These followers generally have less contact with the media and the original information. (Baran and Davis, 2015).
It is important for PR practitioners to consider the two-step flow theory when targeting large audiences, especially if it is likely that a message will be altered by an opinion leader. This means that a practitioner must consider who their message will reach and how they will alter it before it, before it reaches the intended audience.
This is now more important than ever in the modern world, with those who could be seen as opinion leaders, such as politicians, bloggers and celebrities, having access to millions of followers on social media.
Why is this important?
As discussed in the earlier blog, Collective Intelligence in the Post-truth Era, 43 per cent of those who get their news updates online do so through social media. This means it is important to control the narrative in order to get the required message out into the public sphere. It means that opinion leaders must be considered as equally important as the final audience.
The Leave campaign are often accredited with winning the social media battle during the UK’s referendum on EU membership in 2016. Overall, Twitter users who supported leaving the EU were much more active and motivated in advancing their cause (Hanska and Bauchowitz, 2017).
More importantly, however, was the way in which the leaders of the Leave campaign were able to frame the debate and set the agenda. Each and every time some bad news came from Brussels or the Remain campaign slipped up, the Leave campaign would jump on the chance to point the finger.
Where this information would, in the past, be reported directly by the media, Nigel Farage’s tweets would reach millions every day, reporting the news directly with his own spin.
Throughout this blog, I have discussed how social media has changed political campaigning. With each year that passes, more and more people around the world are spending a larger amount of their time online.
With each election that passes, social media will become a more powerful tool to influence the spread of political opinions. PR practitioners must be prepared to consider the role of opinion leaders more closely to ensure their message is heard accurately to take control of the narrative.
References
Baran, S and Davis, D (2015). Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future.
Hanska, M and Bauchowitz, S (2017) Tweeting for Brexit: how social media influenced the referendum. Abramis academic publishing, Bury St Edmunds, UK, pp. 31-35
In my blog post entitled ‘Digital PR and Politics’ I discussed the way in which the internet and social media has ultimately changed how General Elections are won. However, how messaging is produced and distributed is not the only factor of political campaigning which has been changed through the enhancement of digital media.
As digital media can produce and circulate material so quickly, it has the additional benefit of reducing the advantage of political parties with larger financial budgets. This largely assists smaller parties and independent candidates attempting to fight their way into Westminster, gaining them instant media exposure.
While I have discussed the Conservative Party’s use of social media in the 2015 General Election, it was Nigel Farage and UKIP that dominated Google searches, according to Dr Fillippo Trevisan and Dr Paul Reilly. Social analytics firm BirdSong also discovered that during the election period, the Party’s engagement rate was 87 per cent, compared to the Conservative Party’s Conservative nine per cent – although it is worth pointing out that this does not differentiate between positive and negative engagement.
Political campaigning has traditionally focused on working the news cycle. Prior to the substantial use of social media, the day’s political message would be briefed to the press in the morning with the hope that it would fill the news agenda throughout the day. Digital media allows for that cycle to be interrupted in response to live announcements and political activity.
Political parties can now, almost instantly, push out an opposing view to any given political situation in an attempt to steal the headlines. If you visit the Twitter account of any given UK political party, you will find streams of recent news articles being shared with that party’s line on the issue.
Alongside this, Members of Parliament, and even Government Ministers, can take to social media to make instant policy announcements in time for the evening news, even before they are formally announced by the Government. Michael Gove, for example, recently took to Twitter to announce that he had “formally confirmed the UK will not extend the transition period & the moment for extension has now passed.” In some cases, a press release will not be issued and the story will be built around the 280-characters issued from the respective Twitter account.
I just chaired a constructive EU Joint Committee meeting with @MarosSefcovic
I formally confirmed the UK will not extend the transition period & the moment for extension has now passed. On 1 January 2021 we will take back control and regain our political & economic independence pic.twitter.com/nZjNpez8LI
While it can only be a good thing that digital media allows the public to instantly access this information, studies in the US have found that some 46 per cent of adults feel “worn out” by the number of political posts they see on social media. In fact, the Pew Research Center found that across every demographic group, there is more exhaustion than excitement over seeing political content on social media.
Although public relations practitioners, organisations and political parties, both large and small, are finding it ever easier to promote their viewpoints across social media, they must be cautious. The public want to know what is going on in the world and deserve the opportunity to scrutinise the decisions which effect their lives. However, with the rise of anti-establishment sentiment, caution must be taken, in order to keep the reputation of all, to not tire the public.
“None of us can know everything; each of us knows something; and we can put the pieces together if we pool our resources and combine our skills.”
In a world dominated by post-truth politics, these words by Henry Jenkins in his book, Convergence Culture, are now more important than ever.
Collective intelligence allows the public to get closer to democracy, by merging together knowledge from different sources and interacting with the information available, in order to question and challenge authority. The emergence of the internet and online communities has given rise to unlimited opportunities for the public to become engaged with this information.
After dedicated news sites, social media is now the second most important place people discover news online. Politics has always been heavily influenced by the media, and in a world before the internet was invented, politicians and their policies could easily go unscrutinised. Now, however, even before a policy has been announced, it is often leaked by the media on to a social network, where members of the public can state their approval or disdain. Campaign groups and public relations practitioners can create communications almost instantly in response, and the Government can ultimately be lobbied before any official policy announcement has been made.
There are, however, criticisms of this kind of collective intelligence.
First and foremost, do politicians really care about what the public says on social media. After all, can those on social media, although now over 65 per cent of the population in the UK, really reflect the feeling of the wider public? A 2015 Ofcom report found that while 43 per cent of those who get their news updates online do so through social media, a huge 61 per cent of these are between the ages of 16-24 (Hanska, 2017), the age group who overwhelmingly vote for left wing parties.
Secondly, the rise of online collective intelligence has created echo chambers where post-truth claims can be reposted without rebuttal and opposing ideas can be dismissed as being biased without any checking of the facts. Anyone can now access the internet and post their opinions online as ‘truths,’ which are then often shared far and wide by those of a same opinion. Rather than sharing a post based on the accuracy of its content, users in social media bubbles share content based on emotions and feelings. This means that public relations practitioners on the future face a tough challenge to get their messages noticed among all other shared content.
That being said, the potential for social media to be used as a tool to listen and to learn from one another cannot be underestimated. As was seen in Egypt in 2011, social media allows people to come together to effectively question and challenge Government.
As more and more of the public take to social media, PR practitioners will need to become more intelligent and develop better strategies to reach echo chambers and to deal with the rising power of different communities.
References
Hänska, Max & Bauchowitz, Stefan. (2017). Tweeting for Brexit: how social media influenced the referendum.
The internet has played an ever-increasing role in determining the outcome of a General Election.
In 2010, it is estimated that only around 34 per cent of people in the UK were active on social media, compared to more than 65 per cent in 2020 (Statista 2020).
David Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party, pulled off a major shock by winning a clear majority in the 2015 General Election. Up until election day, polling put the Conservatives neck and neck with the Labour Party, with the latter having to form a “messy” collation with the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party (SNP) to have any sort of chance of taking power.
Many political scientists attribute the Conservatives shock win down to a slick and simple election campaign, which focused primarily on two main features – the economy and the potential of an SNP propped up Government in Westminster (Cowley and Kavanagh 2016).
While the previously election in 2010 was seen as the first “social media election,” Facebook was only used as an “interesting way to reach young people.” It was not until the 2015 election that it was truly recognised as a powerful tool that “could reach over half the population and people of all ages” (Channel Four News, 2015).
293,000 potential voters watched the Conservative Party’s short CGI-ed video clip on YouTube in 2015, depicting the then-Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, as an old-fashioned puppet dancing to the tune of the SNP’s Ed Miliband. The video was shared many more thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter.
The Party’s political broadcast pictured a hammer smashing the work of the Conservative Party stating, “this is what happens if we woke up with Ed Miliband in charged propped up by the SNP.”
Infographics from the Conservative’s Twitter account showed images of Miliband, Salmond and even Sinn Fein in number 10.
This imagery continued throughout the campaign, with the media also taking hold of the issue. The Sun’s election day front page read “Stop SNP running the country.”
This message really was the magic bullet, injected into the consciousness of voters and accepted at face value. And it worked…
Just days before election day, a poll of 2,128 found that 43.2 per cent of all voters saw a coalition Government between the Labour Party and the SNP as “illegitimate,” opposed to only 26.9 per cent who said they would feel it was “legitimate” (Survation 2015).
Even more striking, 77 per cent of those who described the potential collation as illegitimate said they had seen all, some or had heard about the Conservative Party election broadcast.
Digital media has truly changed the way political campaigns are run. Once a message takes hold, it can sweep through social media quickly and efficiently, and with little accountability. As time goes on, these elections will be fought and won online, rather than by pounding the streets for hours on end, and as digital media develops, new and exciting techniques to reach potential voters will come into play. More on this later…
References
Cowley, P & Kavanagh, D (2016) The British General Election of 2015. Political Science: London.
Statista (2020) Total number and the share of population of active social media users in the UK.
